right wingers try to frame dissent of Bush policies as being "anti-American"....you can't put people who have 76% of the country AGREEING with them as "hating America". WE ARE AMERICA!!!
This thread was started to point out that there was, and is, a difference between criticizing the current President and hating America.
As liberal columnist Richard Cohen pointed out at the beginning of this thread, there is a disturbing tendency on the left to always assume the worst about America, regardless of who the President is.
Whomod apparently can't dispute that, so he pulled out an irrelevant statistic about the President.
well, I take issue in the entire phrasing of that opinion. "Assuming the worst about America" is nothing more than a natural skepticism that is essential for Democracy. I still to this day do not understand why right wingers think questioning authority is unpatriotic or UnAmerican or treasonous. Only in some authoritarian country would that be so.
Here's a few quotes that echo this sentiment. And frankly I'm beyond tired of conservatives trying to silence dissent by equating it with disloyalty or treason or "hating America". You all would have us live in totalitarism. So i have to wonder at who REALLY "hates America"?
Edward R. Murrow: We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. When the loyal opposition dies, I think the soul of America dies with it.
Harry S Truman: Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.
John F. Kennedy: Without debate, without criticism, no administration and no country can succeed -- and no republic can survive
Martin Luther King Jr.: Human salvation lies in the hands of the creatively maladjusted.
Lyndon B. Johnson: “It is the common failing of totalitarian regimes that they cannot really understand the nature of our democracy. They mistake dissent for disloyalty. They mistake restlessness for a rejection of policy. They mistake a few committees for a country. They misjudge individual speeches for public policy.”
Barbara Ehrenreich: “No matter that patriotism is too often the refuge of scoundrels. Dissent, rebellion, and all-around hell-raising remain the true duty of patriots.”
James Thurber : “Discussion in America means dissent.”
Vaclav Havel: You do not become a "dissident" just because you decide one day to take up this most unusual career. You are thrown into it by your personal sense of responsibility, combined with a complex set of external circumstances. You are cast out of the existing structures and placed in a position of conflict with them. It begins as an attempt to do your work well, and ends with being branded an enemy of society.
Howard Zinn: “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.”
Hubert H. Humphrey: “Freedom is hammered out on the anvil of discussion, dissent, and debate.”
Dwight D. Eisenhower: “May we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion”
I bet each of those people, however, also made it a point to speak well of our nation, our principles and our goals, unlike the "modern leftist," who ONLY attacks the U.S.
Originally Posted By: the G-man
Some liberals claim to love America, but the only thing they ever do is criticize it. They seem to think that patriotism means ONLY criticism of Bush and/or the direction of the country in general.
Isn't is possible, once in a while, to actually say something positive about the place?
Yes yes, but that's just YOUR opinion, YOUR conclusion. You see what you want to see and what you see are not a bunch of people who dissented because they happened to be right, you're mad because they dissented at all. Or perhaps because they dissented and were right all along.
Okay, whomod. Prove me wrong. Show me a group of radical liberals who say something positive about America OTHER than noting that our Constitution gives him or her the right to attack it.
Non-responsive, Halo. This isn't about whether or not America NEEDS the praise of liberals such as yourself. It's about your apparent inability to give praise.
I just don't feel the need to kiss ass. Especially to a land mass. When it all comes down to it all America is is a bunch of people. I have no problem giving those people praise except right now...I don't know them.
Okay, whomod. Prove me wrong. Show me a group of radical liberals who say something positive about America OTHER than noting that our Constitution gives him or her the right to attack it.
Well there you go....
Now it switched to "radical" liberals?
Like who exactly?
And why do you assume that I need to do all the research? You're the one who brought it up.
As for attacking the Constitution, most liberals I know and read have been absolutely LIVID over the attacks this Administration has done to it. They certainly aren't attacking it as have the heroes of some of the people waving the flags vigorously.
But regardless, I stand behind all those quotes I posted above because I wholeheartedly agree with them. Halo said something to the effect that both liberals and conservatives want the same things. I agree with that. Which is why I get ticked off when people start tossing accusations and questioning loyalty. Because more than anything, it's a silencing technique.
If only we'd have had more dissent and more questioning of motives and facts before the Iraq war and from places where it might have made a difference, like say the media. We'd have almost 4000 Americans still alive, we'd probably be doing something about Al queda in Pakistan and and Afghanistan (read about that place lately?) Instead we're essentially stuck in Iraq. For no good reason.
Instead of dissent, investigation, corroboration, skepticism, and curiosity, we got "patriotic" agreement when Cheney and Bush would subtly use Al qaeda and Iraq in the same sentence. We'd get nodding when DRAWINGS of mobile chemical labs were presented. Provided of course by one lone jerkoff named "Curveball". We'd get nodding when people suggested that questioning Bush and dissenting amounted to being in league with Osama Bin laden. All that did was ease the way into a costly disaster.
And ultimately THAT is what this whole bullshit "Do Liberals HATE America" crap has given us. Congratulations.
And it was all due to 9/11. After 9/11 all that seemed to matter was "patriotism" and blind agreement with the leader. And if only we didn't have an Administration and it's sycophants who exploited that sentiment to the hilt. It's like if people demanded that America stop being America and instead be some authoritarian state where all that mattered was that you were loyal and in agreement to whatever the state did and said. And if you weren't then you for all intents and purposes were an enemy of the state. Because of 9/11. Because of fear. Because you had to trust and not question. Because questioning somehow "weakened America" and emboldened "the enemy". Because "these times" didn't allow for the "luxury" of dissent or constitutional rights or International treaties. As if our Constitution is somehow a "luxury" and not the glue that holds this nation together.
"Patriotism" was exemplified by agreeing with this Administration's flawed or dishonest narrative (depending on what you choose to believe) and disloyalty or being "UnAmerican" or "treason" was defined by how much you disagreed with Bush and/or his policies. Again, just a silencing technique.
And 9/11 was the justification. Even though now we're learning about say, warrantless eavesdropping, which was supposedly because of 9/11. Except that the Administration approached at least one telecom company well before 9/11 and asked to spy on Americans. And planned the Iraq war before that as well.
And the dissenters would get slammed, marginalized and ridiculed. And it got bad. Really bad. Scary bad. If you weren't on my side of the aisle I don't really think you can appreciate it as much.
Which is why Keith Olbermann has the sort of following he does. Because he was the one major news source (non blogger or talk radio) who was actually daring to contradict the Administration and present evidence to back up his contradictions when most if not all the media were in lock step to whatever WH press release was passed of as "fact" and truth for fear of being branded disloyal, anti American or whatever other crap the right tossed (and still tosses). When I first saw him, it was so fucking revolutionary that I could hardly believe my eyes. I'm guessing it was something like emerging from the McCarthy 50's into the New Frontier.
America is ultimately a nation based on ideals. Liberals accept nothing less than those ideals and attack the people who bend and abuse the constitution. Nazi Germany might have been better off with a few Liberals who'd be willing to question their rightwing erosion of civil liberties.
This guy ALMOST sums up how I feel about politics/national stuff in general.
Right on,
except that I reject his ultimate conclusion.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)
..is more along the lines of what I believe.
What a dipshit.
He compares the U.S. to Nazi Germany, and advocates abandoning the U.S. to live somewhere else, because the U.S. is "such a bad place", an evil place that has built itself on the murder and destruction of other peoples and nations.
How, in any possible interpretation could that ever be seen by any of you assholes as "patriotic" or pro-American ?!?
Here's a little more of your spiteful excuse for "patriotism": A liberal-doctored TIME magazine cover, that photoshops U.S. soldiers into Nazi stormtroopers. Never mind that we're there helping them build an independent democracy, and that our soldiers, far from committing Nazi-style genocide, are mostly trying to prevent Sunnis and Shias from committing genocide on each other.
You guys really are dumbasses, and oblivious to how anti-American you truly are.
well not all German soldiers in world war ii were nazis, most of them were just soldiers (patriots) serving their country. the leader of their country was a man who came to power through fearmongering and divisive politics and then began a campaign of invading other countries who had not attacked his country. i think wondy if you really loved America you wouldn't hold this "we're always perfect" view and would be more concerned with the number of parallels to nazi germany. if you really loved your country you wouldn't sit idly by while the man you support tarnishes our beloved countries reputation, drives our economy into debt, and costs the lives of thousands of our soldiers on a war he didn't even have the sense to plan ahead. i think if you really loved this country you would be against such destructive acts which only hurt us down to our core. but i guess you're more interested in lip service, say you love the country then vote for the people who are destroying it as long as they promise to keep mexicans out.
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
well not all German soldiers in world war ii were nazis, most of them were just soldiers (patriots) serving their country. the leader of their country was a man who came to power through fearmongering and divisive politics and then began a campaign of invading other countries who had not attacked his country. i think wondy if you really loved America you wouldn't hold this "we're always perfect" view and would be more concerned with the number of parallels to nazi germany. if you really loved your country you wouldn't sit idly by while the man you support tarnishes our beloved countries reputation, drives our economy into debt, and costs the lives of thousands of our soldiers on a war he didn't even have the sense to plan ahead. i think if you really loved this country you would be against such destructive acts which only hurt us down to our core. but i guess you're more interested in lip service, say you love the country then vote for the people who are destroying it as long as they promise to keep mexicans out.
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
well not all German soldiers in world war ii were nazis, most of them were just soldiers (patriots) serving their country. the leader of their country was a man who came to power through fearmongering and divisive politics and then began a campaign of invading other countries who had not attacked his country. i think wondy if you really loved America you wouldn't hold this "we're always perfect" view and would be more concerned with the number of parallels to nazi germany. if you really loved your country you wouldn't sit idly by while the man you support tarnishes our beloved countries reputation, drives our economy into debt, and costs the lives of thousands of our soldiers on a war he didn't even have the sense to plan ahead. i think if you really loved this country you would be against such destructive acts which only hurt us down to our core. but i guess you're more interested in lip service, say you love the country then vote for the people who are destroying it as long as they promise to keep mexicans out.
We've been over this a few hundred times:
A) You're a lying cocksucking weasel.
B) I don't think the U.S. and/or Bush is "always perfect". I've been constructively critical of Bush since he took office, and I didn't vote for him in 2000. I only voted for him in 2004 because the Democrats gave us an even worse alterantive choice. And I've been open about America's historical wrongs, while also exposing your kneejerk anti-Americanism, and I've often countered that the U.S. is not "wrong" in many of the cases you cited, but that the U.S. has often had to choose the lesser of several bad options. And that by your impossible standard, we would have out of principle not allied with Stalin, and would have lost World War II.
Or for the short answer, refer back to A).
C) Neither Bush or McCain have either promised to, or actually, tossed out the Mexicans. Again: refer back to A).
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Some liberals claim to love America, but the only thing they ever do is criticize it. They seem to think that patriotism means ONLY criticism of Bush and/or the direction of the country in general.
Isn't is possible, once in a while, to actually say something positive about the place?
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
maybe if i thought the comments made by wright were out of line or wrong i would care.
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
Every time I praise those social programs, i'm praising America... Every time I talk about what's wrong with America, I am defending America.
Originally Posted By: Captain Sammitch
I'm sure you're defending an America, but it doesn't seem to be the one that actually exists. maybe in imaginary liberal america (pronounced marxist hippie fun land) your actions are pretty damn patriotic. in the real world, however, it's the same sort of America-bashing we've already got pretentious eurotrash for.
Ray thinks attacking the country and demanding material things from it is a "defense".
Like I said, it's reminescient of an abusive relationship.
Yessir, acknowledging our country's problems and trying to fix them is a sure sign of hatred all righty.
What's this "improvement' BS when we already know America's 100% perfect! Always has been! Boy, those anti-slavery agitators back in the 1850s sure hated America.
Some liberals claim to love America, but the only thing they ever do is criticize it. They seem to think that patriotism means ONLY criticism of Bush and/or the direction of the country in general.
Isn't is possible, once in a while, to actually say something positive about the place?
....G-Man....you realize you're copying quotes from one thread, and responding to them in a completely different one, right?
And really, are you so upset that you took the time to go dig up a three-month-old inactive thread, just to randomly rebuttal against the guys that make you mad? lmfao!!
Speaking of Halo.....w-o-w. But, whatever you have to do chief...
Actually, I keep this thread bookmarked because the libs give me such a steady stream of anti-American material (dissentwank?), under the canard of expressing their "patriotism."
Don't get me wrong. As I said before, constructive criticism is fine. And nearly all forms of dissent are protected by Free Speech. As noted in another thread, for example, I may think people who burn the flag are hateful assholes but I strongly oppose efforts to ban flag burning.
However, for far too many of these "patriots" their ONLY form of patriotism is to attack and/or blame America first.
However, for far too many of these "patriots" their ONLY form of patriotism is to attack and/or blame America first.
Okay, serious for a moment?
I agree. I recognize there are extremes to every side. And while I hate the whole Abu-Ghraib thing, I also hated these freaks in Hollywood throwing on "orange ribbons" or whatever in "sympathetic protest". That kind of elitist hypocrisy irks me.
But, even so, just because someone criticizes the administration doesn't necessarily mean they fall into the category you describe...
From origin to civil war to civil rights to protests, America is nothing but open dissent.
So, by that argument, Benedict Arnold, Tokyo Rose, the Rosenbergs and John Walker Lindh are the most patriotic people in American history.
they didn't dissent, they acted against the country by supplying information and direct aid to enemies. and technically lindh didn't really "betray" America. he left to live in another country at a time when that country was on decent terms with America. Just because America invaded his new country and he fought doesn't really make him a "traitor." He was being loyal to the country which he had sworn allegiance to. but at no point did he use his position as a us citizen to undermine the country and spy or commit acts of subversion. dissent is guaranteed in the constitution, it's called free speech. expressing opinions and beliefs, even those criticizing the country, is a core part of what America is supposed to be about.
However, for far too many of these "patriots" their ONLY form of patriotism is to attack and/or blame America first.
Originally Posted By: Prometheus
Okay, serious for a moment?
I agree. I recognize there are extremes to every side. And while I hate the whole Abu-Ghraib thing, I also hated these freaks in Hollywood throwing on "orange ribbons" or whatever in "sympathetic protest". That kind of elitist hypocrisy irks me.
But, even so, just because someone criticizes the administration doesn't necessarily mean they fall into the category you describe...
That's true. And I try to differentiate between legitimately criticizing this administration (even I do that) and stuff like: (a) blanket statements like "God DAMN America"; (b) blowing up shit; (c) stupid shit like saying we're no better than Nazi Germany; (d) people who do nothing BUT justify anti-American behavior.
At the same time, however, I wish some people could differentiate in the opposite direction and realize that not all dissent is patriotic, either.
Someone wants to say that Bush is an incompetent leader who bungled the war? Fine. That's a legitimate, constitutionally protected, opinion even if others might disagree.
Someone wants to say that the Taliban was justified to kill our soldiers because they're "foreign invaders"? That's anti-American assholery by any reasonable person's standard.
Someone wants to say that the Taliban was justified to kill our soldiers because they're "foreign invaders"? That's anti-American assholery by any reasonable person's standard.
Agreed. As someone from the more Goldwater-ian side of the conservative spectrum, I might disagree with people on the lead up to 9/11 and view some of our policies as--more or less--poking a hornet's nest and thinking we wouldn't get stung. But, when it happened. We were within our rights to strike back at al-Queda and its supporters like the Taliban. Anyone who thinks differently is (a) unpatriotic and (b) an idiot.
Someone wants to say that the Taliban was justified to kill our soldiers because they're "foreign invaders"? That's anti-American assholery by any reasonable person's standard.
Agreed. As someone from the more Goldwater-ian side of the conservative spectrum, I might disagree with people on the lead up to 9/11 and view some of our policies as--more or less--poking a hornet's nest and thinking we wouldn't get stung. But, when it happened. We were within our rights to strike back at al-Queda and its supporters like the Taliban. Anyone who thinks differently is (a) unpatriotic and (b) an idiot.
Probably things like sharing similar opinions on the Iraq War and disdain for evangelical conservatives kept things like this from coming to the forefront. Otherwise, I'm quite sure that hate would've started much earlier.
